Yahushua, Yahusha or Jesus?

Radagast · Dec 15, 2017

HARK! said:
What about this one?

Luke 3:29

the son of Joshua, the son of Eliezer, the son of Jorim, the son of Matthat, the son of Levi,

As with Joshua the son of Nun, the Iēsous (Ἰησοῦς) in the Greek text of Luke 3:29 is replaced by "Joshua" in most translations, to avoid confusion.

Radagast · Dec 15, 2017

Soyeong said:
Whenever the KJV or NKJV italicizes a word, it is not a clue to a deeper meaning, but rather it indicates that the word was added for clarity because is not found in the original Greek of Hebrew. It's a bit more complicated than that, but that's the gist of it. He explicitly stated that we should therefore keep the feast and then described that manner in which we should keep it, so even if it is a reference to Jesus, it would simply mean to keep Passover in remembrance of him, not that we should no longer keep Passover.

1 Corinthians 5:7 is telling us that we have one Passover Lamb, Jesus, who was sacrificed for us once. Therefore we no longer keep the Jewish Passover, and we no longer sacrifice any sheep. Instead, Paul tells us to keep a spiritual Passover, with "sincerity and truth" being our bread.

yeshuaslavejeff · Dec 15, 2017

2 Corinthians 7Complete Jewish Bible (CJB)

7 Therefore, my dear friends, since we have these promises, let us purify ourselves from everything that can defile either body or spirit, and strive to be completely holy, out of reverence for God.

Soyeong · Dec 15, 2017

2Timothy2:15 said:
That is not correct, and I was saying it was a clue for you.

Feel free to Google search why words are italicized in the KJV if you don't believe me, but it has nothing to do with providing clues to hidden meanings. In any case, there is nothing in the passage that indicates a change in how Passover is celebrated with the possible exception that it is done in remembrance of him, which is not really anything since it was intended to be done in remembrance of him in the first place.

Also, you did not address any of the scriptures I shared that clearly lay out we are not under the law. I guess you are not really interested in honest discussion.

I have no idea why you think I did not address those Scripture or why you'd think that I'm not interested in an honest discussion. I completely agree that we are not under the law, but I explained how the law that Paul was speaking about us not being under was not the Mosaic Law.

2Timothy2:15 said:
Ahhh there it is, the "greek" mindset, the indoctrination of the church is what you are implying. I have heard this all before.

Do you agree or disagree that it important to try to understand the Bible in the way that the original audiences understood it? Studying the Jewish cultural context of the Bible has been very help in increasing my depth of understand of it.

2Timothy2:15 said:
So then you do not keep the law.

Again, keeping the Law was never about the need for perfect obedience. The Law itself comes with guidelines for what to do when we sin, which would have been completely unnecessary if you sinned once and good no longer be justified. There is nothing in the Bible anything like someone saying that someone sinned once and now they won't be justified, but rather the consistent message of the prophets up to and including Jesus was one of repentance, so the continued practice of repentance and obedience that marks the difference between keeping the Law and being under a blessing or not keeping the Law and being under a curse. Furthermore, we have many verses like Genesis 26:5 that speak about people keeping God's laws, so it not impossible. If you haven't murdered anyone, then you have kept that law even perfectly.

Soyeong · Dec 15, 2017

Radagast said:
1 Corinthians 5:7 is telling us that we have one Passover Lamb, Jesus, who was sacrificed for us once. Therefore we no longer keep the Jewish Passover, and we no longer sacrifice any sheep. Instead, Paul tells us to keep a spiritual Passover, with "sincerity and truth" being our bread.

Paul continued to make offerings, such as when he took a Nazarite vow in in Acts 18:18 (Numbers 6) or in Acts 21:20-24 when he was on his way to pay for the expenses of others who had undertaken a similar vow, in order to disprove false rumors that he was teaching against the Law and to show that he continued to live in obedience to it. Furthermore, the Bible prophesies a time when a third temple will be built and when offerings will resume and when we will all keep God's feasts. There is nothing in the Bible that says that we should no longer obey God's command or follow Christ's example.

HARK! · Dec 16, 2017

Radagast said:
As with Joshua the son of Nun, the Iēsous (Ἰησοῦς) in the Greek text of Luke 3:29 is replaced by "Joshua" in most translations, to avoid confusion.

I would agree that using the name "Jesus," a name that isn't even a Hebrew name; nor does it fulfill the scripture that the Messiah would come in Yahweh's name; neither does it express that Yahweh is our salvation, does present a bit of potential confusion; and as we know; Yahweh is not the author of confusion.

Every time you say Yahshua; you proclaim Yah (Yahweh) is shua (salvation.)

I'll continue to call on his name.

Acts 4:12

New International Version
Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to mankind by which we must be saved."

HARK! · Dec 16, 2017

Soyeong said:
Feel free to Google search why words are italicized in the KJV

Web results:

The Italicized Words in the King James Bible
www.biblebelievers.com/jmelton/italics.html
The italicized words in the King James Bible are words that were added by the translators to help the reader. This is usually necessary when translating from one language to another because word meanings and idioms change. So, to produce a more readable translation, the King James translators (1604- 1611) added certain words to the Bible text.
The Use of Italics in the King J - Logos Resource Pages
www.logosresourcepages.org/Versions/italics.htm
In fact, the words in italics in the King James Bible are words that were added by the translators to help the reader. This is usually necessary when translating from one language to another because a word in one language may not have a corollary word in English and idiomatic expressions often do not easily move from one language to another.
Why are some words in the KJV italicized? I don't see this in ...
www.chick.com/ask/articles/italics.asp
The italics usually are a simple way of telling us when the word in English is not in the Hebrew or the Greek.

That was easy!

2Timothy2:15 · Dec 16, 2017

Soyeong said:
In any case, there is nothing in the passage that indicates a change in how Passover is celebrated

Yes there is, in the context. If you can't see it I can't show you. I pray the Lord does though.

Soyeong said:
Again, keeping the Law was never about the need for perfect obedience.

You are taking both side, saying you keep the law, but you don't. The bible says we are not under the law, that is not hard to understand. You are putting it in the wrong frame, putting obedience of the law as if that is the purpose. The purpose of the law was to point to a Savior that is the only one who could and that not you or me, or anyone can ever keep it which is why we need a Savior who could, Jesus.

You said you keep the law as much as you can, and then repent. So you repent every time you shave? But you continue to shave everyday. Seriously, sit and think about what you are saying.

Soyeong said:
There is nothing in the Bible anything like someone saying that someone sinned once and now they won't be justified

Soyeong said:
or not keeping the Law and being under a curse.

Here you got it backwards again, those who try and keep the law are under a curse.

Please read carefully and prayfully consider.
Galations 3:10
For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.

ViaCrucis · Dec 16, 2017

HARK! said:
Perhaps you can explain to me why in every other place the name "Yahshua" appears in scripture,

Never does. As has been explained to you many times "Yahshua" isn't a name.

(There are many places.) even in the "New Testament," except when it comes to the Messiah, the name is translated or transliterated to Joshua.

Never appears in Scripture. The names which appear in the Hebrew of the Old Testament are יְהוֹשֻׁעַ and יֵשׁוּעַ. Neither of these appear in the New Testament, where IHΣOYΣ/IHCOYC is used, abbreviated in most ancient manuscripts as IC with a bar to indicate nomen sacrum. In modern Greek, which has miniscules (lowercase), it is written Ἰησοῦς.

-CryptoLutheran

Radagast · Dec 16, 2017

HARK! said:
I would agree that using the name "Jesus," a name that isn't even a Hebrew name

Your argument seems to be with God, who gave us the New Testament in Greek.

Buzz_B · Dec 16, 2017

LivingRightInWrongWorld said:
A little Bible study that I did on the name of our Lord Jesus. What are your opinions on it? I believe that salvation is in the name of Jesus or in any of the previous forms of the name. People claiming only salvation under one transliteration of the name are making confusion and divide the body of Christ.

God bless in Jesus name.

Biblically, merely pronouncing a name did nothing for anyone. Honoring the person behind the name regardless of what language one speaks the name in is the thing which is required before that name is of any benefit to anyone. The reputation of the person behind the name does not change just because you speak the name in a different language and the word translated "name" in Hebrew can just as accurately be translated, "renoun."

If I sent a representative out in my name but that representative did not represent my directions and wishes in the way he presented me to others I would rather he not even use my name at all, for he would be dishonoring me. I don't care what language he uses to pronounce my name so long as he properly represents me, for that is the important thing.

The Scribes and the Pharisees practiced the kind of pettiness which would make issue of mere pronunciations which only ends up overshadowing the more aspects of calling on a name, that of properly honoring the one who bears that name.

Devin P · Dec 16, 2017

LivingRightInWrongWorld said:
A little Bible study that I did on the name of our Lord Jesus. What are your opinions on it? I believe that salvation is in the name of Jesus or in any of the previous forms of the name. People claiming only salvation under one transliteration of the name are making confusion and divide the body of Christ.

God bless in Jesus name.

His Aramaic name is Yeshua
His Hebraic name is Yahoshua

Both mean Yah is salvation

YHWH (יהוה) is God's actual name. God is just a title. There are many ways to say YHWH, but I feel like it's pronounced Yahuwah, because the hebraic names of the prophets and more are names all have that "Yahu" sound in them.

Yeshayahu (Isaiah) which means salvation of Yah
Yirmeyahu (Jeremiah) which means exaltation of Yah
Mattithyahu (Matthew) which means gift of Yah, etc, etc

There are people on here who are claiming using the real name of Yeshua is of the devil, which saddens me, because (while I was saved using the name Jesus) Jesus is still only a 400-500 year old name. I don't think it's a salvation issue to use the name Yeshua over Jesus, but once we realize the meaning of the name Yeshua, and realize that He was never called Jesus when He was alive, it hopefully moves us to want to be closer to Him by using His actual name.

I do believe He meets us where we're at though, so if some aren't ready to research into the history of the names yet, it's fine, God will be patient with them and meet them where they're at. I don't think it's wrong to use words like God or Jesus, but God is not our Creator's name. In exodus He told us to forever call Him יהוה (YHWH), and the name the Angel have Mary for our savior wasn't the Greek/English name Jesus, it was Hebraic - Yahoshua, (which when translated into the one of the languages most prevalent at the time where Jesus grew up - Aramaic it's Yeshua.)

Both of the names (based on the definition of the actual words in their respective languages) literally mean salvation. Jesus (based on the actual word in Greek or English) has no meaning, it's just a transliteration of how they'd say His name in Greek because Greek doesn't have the phonetic sounds required to say Yahoshua or Yeshua.

SteveCaruso · Dec 16, 2017

Devin P said:
Yahoshua

The prefixed theophoric is "Yeho-".

The suffix is "-yahu".

"Yaho-" doesn't happen.

HARK! · Dec 16, 2017

Radagast said:
Your argument seems to be with God, who gave us the New Testament in Greek.

That's a bold statement for someone who doesn't have access to the autograph copies.

“Matthew put down the words of the Lord in the Hebrew language, and others have translated them, each as best he could.” -Papias, bishop of Hierapolis, c. 150 A.D

Devin P · Dec 16, 2017

SteveCaruso said:
The prefixed theophoric is "Yeho-".

The suffix is "-yahu".

"Yaho-" doesn't happen.

So you're saying Yehoshua not Yahoshua?

SteveCaruso · Dec 16, 2017

Radagast said:
Pretend Aramaic, not real Aramaic.

No, Yeshua (ישוע) is the genuine Aramaic form. It was adopted into Hebrew after the Exile.

HARK! · Dec 16, 2017

SteveCaruso said:
No, Yeshua (ישוע) is the genuine Aramaic form. It was adopted into Hebrew after the Exile.

What do you know about the Hebrew, pre-exile, form?

DamianWarS · Dec 16, 2017

LivingRightInWrongWorld said:
A little Bible study that I did on the name of our Lord Jesus. What are your opinions on it? I believe that salvation is in the name of Jesus or in any of the previous forms of the name. People claiming only salvation under one transliteration of the name are making confusion and divide the body of Christ.

God bless in Jesus name.

the name of Jesus is not some incantation. It is not the phonetic sounds that come from our mouth that has any power it is the person behind that name and our heart when citing his name. We see this same spirit manifested in scripture in Acts 19:16 where Jewish priests actually have adopted using the name of Jesus to cast out evil spirits but it didn't work and the spirits just fired back at them "Jesus I know, and Paul I know about, but who are you?" I am quite certain those Jews were pronouncing his name properly but the voiced name had no power.

This quest of finding the perfect pronunciation is fruitless and is in the same spirit of trying to figure out the correct pronunciation of Yahweh. There is no power in these sounds and subscribing to that thinking is counter-gospel and a pagan mindset.

SteveCaruso · Dec 16, 2017

Devin P said:
So you're saying Yehoshua not Yahoshua?

Correct.

SteveCaruso · Dec 16, 2017

HARK! said:
What do you know about the Hebrew, pre-exile, form?

The Hebrew form was (and is) Yehoshua. Yeshua first appears in Post-Exilic literature.

Yahushua, Yahusha or Jesus?

comes and goes

comes and goes

simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

שמע

שמע

Well-Known Member

Confessional Lutheran

comes and goes

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Translator

שמע

Well-Known Member

Translator

שמע

Follower of Isa Al Masih

Translator

Translator

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency